Case law

Andrews v. Sercombe

82 Or. 616 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 23, 1917

, to the official board or quarterly conference for consideration, approval, and directions. … Talbot, 32 Ky. (2 Dana) 258 ; Jones v. Plater, 2 Gill (Md.), 125 ( 41 Am. Dec. 408 ). The decree of the Circuit Court is affirmed. Affirmed.

Oregon-Wash. R. & N. Co. v. Johnson

87 Or. 240 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 29, 1918

laws the duties imposed on the county clerk or auditor shall be performed by the clerical officer or auditor of the tax-levying district and the duties imposed upon the county court shall be performed by the tax-levying board … It has been held by this court in State ex rel. v. Johnson, 80 Or. 107, 112 ( 156 Pac. 579 ), that a disregard of the budget law is fatal to the validity of a tax levy.

Maddox v. State Accident Insurance Fund

290 Or. 357 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1981

The Workers’ Compensation Board and the Court of Appeals in a Per Curiam opinion, citing its decision in James v. SAIF, 44 Or App 520 , 605 P2d 1391 (1980), affirmed. … The question is the one we stated in James v. SAIF and the one answered by the dissenting member of the Workers’ Compensation Board.

Burness v. Multnomah County

37 Or. 460 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 11, 1900

Woodruff, 10 Or. 133 ; White v. Commissioners, 13 Or. 317 , 57 Am. Rep. 20 , 10 Pac. 484 ; Wormington v. Pierce, 22 Or. 606 , 30 Pac. 450 ; Sherman v. Bellows, 24 Or. 553 , 34 Pac. 549 ; Avery v. … Wayne v. Lehr, *469 88 Ind. 62 ; Smith v. Los Angeles County, 99 Cal. 628 ( 84 Pac. 439 ); House v. Los Angeles County, 104 Cal. 73 ( 37 Pac. 796 ). 2.

Lizotte v. Eastern Oregon Hospital

303 Or. 456 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1987

The Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) affirmed and adopted the opinion of the referee without elaboration. After our decision in Barrett v. … Gettman v. SAIF, 289 Or 609, 612-13 , 616 P2d 473 (1980). However, the circumstances of this case suggest that the Court of Appeals may have affirmed the Board under an erroneous interpretation of the law.

State v. Davis

315 Or. 484 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1993

The case is remanded to the circuit court for resentencing. 1 In State v. … See State v.

Dix v. Port of Port Orford

131 Or. 157 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 24, 1929

Under the rules of this court it is a waiver of the right to be heard: Johnson v. White, 60 Or. 611 , ( 112 Pac. 1083 , 119 Pac. 769 ). … It held title to property which had been acquired for strictly corporate uses: City National Bank v. Kiowa, 104 Okl. 161 , ( 230 P. 894 , 39 A. L. R. 206 (note)).

State v. Herzog

324 Or. 294 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 11, 1996

The trial court held that that scientific technique satisfied the standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence articulated by the court in State v. Brown, 297 Or 404 , 687 P2d 751 (1984). … See State v. Lyons, 324 Or 256 , 261 n 7, 924 P2d 802 (1996) (discussing the admissibility of DNA evidence). The decision of the Court of Appeals and the judgments of the circuit court are affirmed.

Solomon v. Glickman

140 Or. 364 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 28, 1932

Having this day held in Glickman v. Solomon that the judgment therein was merely voidable and, therefore, not subject to collateral attack, it follows that the judgment in the instant case is affirmed. Bean, C. … J., Brown and Campbell, JJ., concur.

Housley v. Linnton Plywood Ass'n

210 Or. 520 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 22, 1957

Whitney v. Bissell, 75 Or 28, 35 , 146 P 141 . See, also, Wilson v. Empire Holding Corp., 145 Or 598, 601 , 28 P2d 843 ; Cameron v. Edgemont Investment Co., 136 Or 385, 397 , 299 P 698 ; Union Central Life Ins. Co. v. … Smith v. Aplanalp, 126 Or 213, 216 , 267 P 1070 ; Yokota v. Lindsay, 116 Or 641, 645 , 242 P 613 ; Gabel v. Armstrong, 88 Or 84, 91 , 171 P 190 ; Hanna v. Hope, 86 Or 303 , 168 P 618 ; Kreinbring v.

McDonough v. National Hospital Ass'n

134 Or. 451 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1930

A. 1916F 319); Booth & Flinn v. Cook, 79 Okla. 280 ( 193 P. 36 ); Brown v. Sinclair Ref. Co., 86 Okla. 143 ( 206 P. 1042 ); Kirby v. Ellison (Tex.) 270 S. W. 920 ; Hooyman v. Reeve, 168 Wis. 420 ( 170 N. … W. 282 ); Spelman v. Pirie, 233 Ill. App. 6 ; Vatalaro v. Thomas, 262 Mass. 383 ( 160 N. E. 269 ); Gregutis v. Waclark Wire Works, 86 N. J. L. 610 ( 92 Atl. 354 ); Allard v. Browne, 2 Cal. I. A. C. 489; Johnson v.

State v. Morris

83 Or. 429 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1917

He said, ‘Well, I think, and many others on board the ship think, that Brown is the murderer; but I don’t know anything about it.’ He was rather short in his replies.” … Justice Brown in Brown v. Walker, 161 U. S. 591, 596 ( 40 L. Ed. 819 , 16 Sup. Ct.

Thomas v. Foglio

225 Or. 540 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1961

McGuire v. Brown, 217 Or 300, 310 , 342 P2d 774 (1959). The Act applies “even though only one of the covered employers may be said to be in actual control of the site where the work is under way.” Pruett v. … Some of these cases are reviewed in State (PUC) v. O. K. Transfer Co., 215 Or 8 , 330 P2d 510 (1958) and in Brown v. Bonesteele, 218 Or 312 , 344 P2d 928 (1959). In State (PUC) v. O. K.

Raley v. Umatilla County

15 Or. 172 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 10, 1887

McDonough, 15 How. 367; Vidal v. Gerard’s Ex’rs, 2 How. 127; Bell County v. Alexander, 22. Tex. *178 350; Coggeshall v. Pelton, 7 Johns. Ch. 292 . But aside from these authorities, the case of Brown v. … (Brown v. Caldwell, 23 W. Va. 187 .)

State v. Gates

104 Or. 112 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 27, 1922

Dist. v. Pacific Livestock Co., 89 Or. 19, 24 ( 173 Pac. 265 ). … If such was not the meaning of the act of 1901, then the closing order approved in Portland Fish Co. v. Benson, 56 Or. 147 ( 108 Pac. 122 ), was in excess of the authority of the board.

Marston v. STATE COMPENSATION DEPARTMENT

252 Or. 640 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1969

OBS 656.002 (5) (6) (7); Syler v. S.I.A.C., 244 Or 541 , 419 P2d 411 . The claimant then appealed the order of the Workmen’s Compensation Board to the circuit court. … Howerton v. Pfaff, 246 Or 341 , 425 P2d 533 ; McKay v. State Ind. Acc.

State v. Unger

356 Or. 59 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 28, 2014

Painter, 296 Or 422, 425 , 676 P2d 309 (1984) (relying on Brown and Wong Sun); State v. Wolfe, 295 Or 567, 572 , 669 P2d 320 (1983) (relying on Brown). … (Emphasis in original.)); Com. v. Brown, 456 Mass 708, 715, 925 NE2d 845 (2010) (“One of the purposes * * * is the deterrence of police [mis] conduct * * *.

Clauder v. Morser

204 Or. 378 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 13, 1955

Justice Jackson when he said in United States v. Oregon Med. … Boyd v. Boyd, 252 N.Y. 422, 429 , 169 N.E. 632, 634 .” Affirmed, with costs to neither party.

Judson v. Bee Hive Auto Service Co.

136 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1930

A. 1918D, 920); Doherty v. Hazelwood Co., 90 Or. 475 ( 175 P. 849 , 177 P. 432 ); Sather v. Giaconi, 110 Or. 433 ( 220 P. 740 ). … Kelly, Bean and Brown, JJ., concur.

State v. Lynch

20 Or. 389 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1891

The indictment charges that the assault was made upon the prosecutorwith the intent him, the said James Brown, to then and there kill and murder.” … And in effect the same doctrine is announced in People v. Congleton, 44 Cal. 92 ; People v. Swenson, 49 Cal. 388 .